As if to defy polls showing Canadians couldn't give a hoot about the Royal Family, Queen's Park was all abuzz last Wednesday.

As soon as the bells clanged signalling the end of the legislative day, MPPs and staff scrubbed up and stampeded for the exits.

They were all heading in the same direction -- a reception for Prince Charles and his wife, Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, at the posh Carlu.

(Much to my chagrin, the Press Gallery wasn't invited. Then again, the Royals aren't exactly cosy with the media. Still, as the last monarchist in the gallery, I was crushed.)

Criticism of the monarchy is mostly based on a lack of knowledge. We simply don't teach our children the fundamentals of parliamentary democracy and the role of the constitutional monarch.

And in a day and age when we like to measure success in dollars and cents, the royals to some extent fuel a culture of envy. Yet they can't help being born rich and powerful.

But you can't buy your way into their social circle.

Those who do find themselves rebuffed. Harrods owner Mohammed al-Fayed tried. He found all his cash couldn't buy him a royal connection. What it bought Fayed was disaster when he tried to matchmake his son, Dodi, with Diana, the Princess of Wales.

I see Prince Charles as a tragic figure. If Shakespeare were around, he could write a spectacular play about his life. Charles was caught in a time warp. When he was born, kings were expected to be brave leaders.

His grandmother, especially, showed great leadership during the Second World War, frequently visiting the beleaguered East End of London, thereby endearing her in the hearts of Londoners.

The royal connection to the military is still strong -- right down to Prince Harry, who was deployed with his regiment to Afghanistan last year. Prince Andrew served in the Falklands War.

Once upon a time, princes were told whom they could marry -- preferably a foreign princess to cement a political alliance. It was an accepted practice and it was understood that they'd keep a mistress on the side for a bit of slap and tickle.

Then we changed the rules. Charles was expected to marry a pretty young thing, and fall madly, deeply in love. Only problem was, the world forgot to tell him that.

SHOWED DIGNITY

The person I felt most sorry for in the marriage break-down was Camilla. She showed some dignity by not engaging in mud-slinging. Yet she was vilified as "the Rottweiler." For what?

The world just couldn't forgive Charles for preferring a woman his own age who wasn't a perfect size 2 dress size, to the glamorous Diana, who was a clothes horse for the British fashion industry.

Had she lived, Diana would be only 48. Charles turns 61 this month. That's a big age difference. By all accounts, she was fun, but slightly shallow. He's thoughtful and smart.

Remember when it was fashionable to mock Charles for his views on architecture and organic farming? Look around at the soulless condos we keep throwing up. He was spot-on about architecture. Mad cow disease and BSE proved him right on farming.

There are some who would like Canada to dump the monarchy. That would be a mistake.

This is the land of the Empire loyalists -- the place people came to to escape the new republic to our south.

The Crown provides wise and good counsel -- a sober second voice that is above the machinations of politics. It has moulded our most cherished institutions -- our justice system and parliamentary democracy. It's a structure that has made this country a haven of peace and justice for immigrants from around the world.

Get rid of the monarchy? Go ahead. Just be careful what you replace it with.